I attended a lecture on CRT last year, sort of a CRT for dummies introduction by one of the faculty at the Navy War College, who had taught CRT and other related subjects in the University of Oregon system for many years. I would say she did a great job presenting it academically, did not try to sell anyone on it, but in reply to my questions, where does CRT take us? what alternative system does it provide? She readily admitted that it's sole purpose is really to undermine the existing structures, and provides nothing in its place. I replied, it seems it only leads to despair and anger, and she again readily admitted that that is the most common response to CRT. I also pressed to find the supporting structure for CRT - in science a theory is formed after some observation. No such thing exists for CRT; you must first believe all the tenets of CRT to be true, in order for the theory to work. Its a very elaborate tautology. If you believe it with your whole heart, then everything makes sense - does not provide hope, but it answers a lot of the questions why in a way that satisfy a pre-existing bias. It is, however, a social theory who's validity can only be proven in controlled settings where all the presuppositions believe CRT to be true. If you are skeptical, or outright deny the validity of the theory, it cannot stand under that level of scrutiny. As social sciences go, its one of the weakest theories ever offered, and yet one of the most commonly held because it satisfies the ego's need for an "other" to blame for things.
There is some tacit pressure to include the assumptions of CRT in the classes I lead, and I've recently been designated to a collateral duty which only makes sense if CRT is assumed. Given the makeup of the DOD's advisory council on human affairs, I suspect the assumptions of CRT will be baked into every level of military training and education in the coming years, without using the actual technical language. An example is the push now to restore photos to promotion boards. They were removed so as to remove racism from the selection process, the assumption being that if I did not know the color of the candidate, and only the merit, then we would see a natural elimination of racial bias, and increase in diversity of outcomes. We did not, in fact, we saw the opposite; once the photos were removed, and boards were based entirely on merit, diversity plummeted. Now we want the photos back for the opposite reason - if we knew the candidate was a BIPOC we'd be more likely to promote them. All of that is rooted in CRT.